Bible Strands

Galatians 3:21

Is the law, then, opposed to the promises of God? Certainly not! For if a law had been given that could impart life, then righteousness would certainly have come from the law.

Berean Standard Bible

Follow its threads on the canvas →

Study note

Setting — Paul addresses the Galatian believers to correct a theological error regarding the Mosaic covenant. He poses this question immediately after explaining the temporary, intermediary role of the law between the Abrahamic promise and Christ.

The words — The Greek νόμος (nomos) denotes the Mosaic legislation, while κατά (kata) conveys direct opposition. Paul uses these terms to frame a rhetorical question that forces a clear distinction between statutory requirement and divine promise.

The thread — The text explicitly states that the law does not impart life, and therefore righteousness cannot originate from it. This logical boundary appears in Galatians 2:21 regarding righteousness, and is expanded in Romans 3:20 and Romans 9:31 regarding the law's inability to justify or secure covenant standing.

Why it lands — The passage requires a reader to abandon reliance on legislative performance for covenant standing. It directs attention exclusively to faith in Christ as the only means of receiving the promised blessing.

Drafted by a language model from the text, its original words and its cross-references, then checked against them. It can still be wrong: open the verse in the app to report it.

The Greek words

King James Version

Is the law then against the promises of God? God forbid: for if there had been a law given which could have given life, verily righteousness should have been by the law.

Cross-references